The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was keep. Keep voters have successfully argued that this term is in use and unambiguous. It's certainly not necessary, but neither is it harmful or misleading. --BDD (talk) 13:54, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• 'Arry Redknapp'Arry Redknapp → Harry Redknapp  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: /delete ] 

Unlikely search term.. JMHamo (talk) 21:00, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. JMHamo (talk) 21:04, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. Arry Redknapp (without the apos) R's to same target. It's a common example of H droppingH dropping (itself an R to section) that I do all the time in my accent, but to put the apos on the front of it does seem an unlikely search term. Si Trew (talk) 23:53, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - unlikely search term. GiantSnowman 08:34, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - who is ever going to type this into the search box?? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:29, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, widely used, likely to be copy-pasted if not typed. Also unambiguous and harmless. Siuenti (talk) 23:37, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, commonly used name. Like here, and in the comment thread of here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tideflat (talk • contribs) 03:31, 8 March 2015
• Keep - apparently an affectionate {{R from nickname}}. Ivanvector (talk) 14:22, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Common nickname, and does no harm. --Mr. Guye (talk) 17:46, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - a very unlikely search term to start with an apostrophe. A search in the box will automatically bring up Harry Redknapp in any case is this term is used. Mountain^cirque 15:43, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. This probably could've redirected to the dab, but I didn't think anything there was very likely to be referred to as "The Frisky". If anyone feels strongly about it and wants to recreate as a redirect there, you may do so. No need to contact me. --BDD (talk) 13:52, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• The Frisky → SpinMedia  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: /delete ] 

Not mentioned at target (which is apparently the publisher) and not likely a notable website. Either way, the redirect should be deleted. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 06:07, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: I think minor websites of publishers with pages should have a redirect to the publisher.--Shortride (talk) 15:59, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Minor websites of publishers' imprints have no business on Wikipedia. The emphasis there is no business. We're not an ad site. Si Trew (talk) 00:01, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• REtarget to Frisky ; if this can be sourced and added to the SpinMedia article, an entry at Frisky can be assed for SpinMedia -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 03:59, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I can see your reasoning, but that's just encouraging them. I get a lot of freelance contracts for "putting words into a well known website", which of course I refuse. We are not an advertising website. Si Trew (talk) 20:28, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would redirect it regardless of whether an article on SpinMedia existed or not. "The xyz" would be a something of a default redirect for a pagename "xyz" if no other primary topic existed -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 04:24, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget per 70.51. If it is notable enough to appear at SpinMedia then we can list it on the dab page, but that does not appear to be the case. Ivanvector (talk) 17:41, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was keep. JohnCD (talk) 13:13, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Closet You'll Love It!Closet You'll Love It! → Closet? You'll Love It!  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: /delete ] 

Error in creation. No pages link to this, or are likely to. — Confession0791 ^talk 02:34, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as {{R from modification}}. Redirects exist partly to aid searching, not solely to aid linking. This is a legitimate search term. --Mr. Guye (talk) 02:45, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, it's an {{R from move}} and seems like a likely search term to me. Linking (or the lack thereof) isn't a reason for deletion. Tavix |  Talk  21:46, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete first two, keep Nintendo 128. JohnCD (talk) 13:09, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Nintendo 512 → Wii U  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: /delete ] 
• Nintendo 256 → Wii  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: /delete ] Mr. Guye (talk) 01:15, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Nintendo 128 → GameCube  (withdrawn)

Something to do with bits. Does not warrant a redirect. Also nominated for the same reason:

• Delete - likewise I imagine something to do with processing bits. NES was 8-bit, Super NES 16-bit, and Nintendo 64 64-bit, but Wii and Wii U did not likewise add bits to their processing technology (in fact both are 32-bit), and this is not a versioning system. Ivanvector (talk) 02:59, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I did a search in Google, It refers to the Megabytes of memory, but I could not find the term Nintendo 512 been used.--Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 13:18, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:30, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I suspect that the pattern is Nintendo 128 means the GameCube... OH GOD IT IS DELETE THAT TOO. 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 12:57, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Adding Nintendo 128. GameCube does seem to have been based on a 128-bit graphics architecture, but was never known by that name, so I think delete per the non-existence of Nintendo 8 and Nintendo 16. Again, this is not a versioning system, and a 2ⁿ versioning system would be ridiculous anyway. Ivanvector (talk) 14:20, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• I disagree on the late addition of Nintendo 128. Although it is a similar redirect to the others, I feel like it should require a separate discussion. For one, it has already had an RfD that was kept back in 2006. Second, the GameCube was actually referred to that name (especially during development when people were guessing at the next name). Seeing as it came after the Nintendo 64 and actually does (did?) have 128-bits, it makes sense to keep it. Tavix |  Talk  21:43, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, based on that discussion then keep Nintendo 128 but still delete the others. I had never heard it referred to by that name but if others have then it makes sense. Hisashiyarouin already suggested deleting that redirect so I won't withdraw it. Ivanvector (talk) 13:46, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I intend that as a snide remark to try and make sense of the stretch that is N256 and N512. Putting aside the banter though, keep (or withdraw on my part?) N128 but really could use a mention in GameCube with cites like [1]. 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 00:32, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, consider that one withdrawn. Ivanvector (talk) 00:50, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I am not aware of either the Wii or Wii U being called the 256 or the 512.--64.229.166.35 (talk) 03:30, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Retarget by snowball consensus. (Or withdrawn, I dunno.) (non-admin closure) Si Trew (talk) 04:12, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• TIP Trailer ServicesTIP Trailer Services → GE Equipment Services  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: /delete ] 

TIPTS is no longer part of GEES, see website. Since there is no standalone article, the redirect is incorrect. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 00:08, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to GE_Trailer_Fleet_Services, where it is in first sentence of lede (saying no longer part of GE). Redirects do not have to be WP:RS, they just have to be useful... That is always, I think, a bit of clairvoyancy because we have to assume that other readers search in the weird ways that we do. Si Trew (talk) 23:47, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Thanks SimonTrew. I have no problem with this whatsoever, I think it's a good idea. Just didn't occur to me. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 16:47, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.